beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.04.17 2013노2154

명예훼손

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

At the time of bringing a construction section to F, the Defendant did not engage in the same words as the stated in the facts charged of this case, and there is no reason to make such words that may cause the dispute with E in connection with the construction section kept by the Defendant, and even if such words were made, they were told to F, the representative director of the company, who works as the factory site, and are likely to spread in light of the special relationship among them.

No person may be deemed to have had an intentional act of defamation or defamation.

Judgment

Around April 10, 2012, the Defendant injured the victim’s reputation by openly pointing out false facts in the office of the corporation D (hereinafter referred to as “D”) located in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and despite the fact that the victim E has stolen D’s tools, the Defendant, despite of the absence of the victim E’s theft of D’s tools, damaged the victim’s reputation by publicly pointing out false facts.

The lower court determined the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by taking account of the evidence presented in the judgment below.

First of all, the judgment of the court of the first instance on April 10, 2012 regarding whether the Defendant made a statement to F, the representative director of D, as described in the facts charged in the instant case, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① consistently made the above statement from the Defendant; ② The F, a third party with no particular interest in the instant case, has credibility on the grounds that the contents of the statement are specific, consistent and consistent, and consistent with the empirical rule, can be acknowledged as a fact that the Defendant made a statement as described in the facts charged.

Next, we examine whether performance requirements are met.

Public performance, which is the constituent element of defamation, refers to a state in which many and unspecified persons can recognize it, and one person individually.